I think that one of the biggest problems I had with liking this book was the fact that I didn't like Jacob. It mentioned early in the book that he viewed women as inferior. I thought this was an interesting detail for a feminist writer to add about her protagonist. It was also the fact that he slept prostitutes, and plenty of other women he didn't really care about. It's intriguing that this book is called Jacob's Room because throughout most of it, it seems that his part is not particularly prominent. I saw him as a weak character, and although he may have been written about with deep, complex language, I think that Jacob himself was just the opposite. Why would Woolf choose this kind of character to be her protagonist? Maybe it's the fact that he's imperfect; he's human. But that's just not fun to read about. - LDo-c Feb 1, 2008
LDO, I couldn't agree more. Jacob was not fun to read about; I frankly did not like him as a character. The way he treated women even really on made me not like this book. One woman that stands out in my mind is Florinda. Yes, she was beautiful, not she was completely brainless and basically a prostitute. She could not fulfill his desire for an intelligent companion, but that was okay because was good looking. I don't know maybe Woolf wants us to see Jacob making foolish decisions like this so that we are like hey that's not really smart. I think that Woolf, a "feminist writer," to use a character that "viewed women as inferior" was her way of proving that women seriously are not inferior. Maybe in not liking him, I could somewhat understand Woolf better. Any other thoughts? - kva-c Feb 1, 2008
I think that being able to see the dark side of Jacob is just another way that Woolf adds reality to her novel. She could probably focus on all of his good traits, and would seem just as admirable as any other protagonist, but we get to see Jacob for what he is and that makes him more human, or at least as human as a fictional character could possibly be. Most heros have one major flaw, but Jacob has many flaws because he is just like any other normal person, and is not at all perfect. This made him less of a likeable character, but I thought it was kind of cool to see the dark side of his character, and see a realistic view of what he is and not just some flawless person who would be much easier to like. - jko-c Feb 1, 2008
All of you make great points about Jacob's Room. I have to agree with LDo, why would someone want to read a book about a man who thinks women are inferior? Who wants to read a book about someone who has flaws? But you have to remember, almost every single book you read, there will be a character, most of the time the main character, that has flaws. It is those flaws that could either bring that character down, or help bring them up.
It is good to read a book that has a character with flaws. How would you feel if you read a book with a practically perfect person. I personally think that it would be a boring book. We would have a character that never screws up, never gets into trouble, and pretty much has nothing that exciting happen to them. It is through the flaws and imperfections that we can see the excitement and craziness of the protagonist's world. - szd-c Feb 1, 2008
I agree with szd, flaws are the elements of characters that make them interesting. If characters didn't have flaws, we would basically be reading fairy tales. Yes they were exciting when we were in preschool, but we soon lost interest in their simple characters and plots because we progressed intellectually. It just seems natural to eventually crave more out the literarure we read. Not to say that every protagonist in the books we read has to be a serial killer or someone who is so messed up they commit suicide, but reading about characters with flaws and their battles to overcome those flaws is interesting. Remember, even Jesus was tempted in the desert by Satan. Jesus isn't evil because he had minor flaws, but it did make for a good read to seem him overcome them. - MKo-c Feb 1, 2008
Along with what MKo and SZd were saying, none of us are perfect. I for one would hate reading a book about a perfect man who handles everything perfectly. There would be no conflict, no learning or growth, and to the plot would be boring too. Even if you didn't like Jacob as a person he is still a perfect fit for the protagnistic role I think. He's a guy who we can have a strange fascination with just as many of the other characters do in the book. Sorry to all the girls, but who cares if he treated women as objects? Show me a guy who didn't do that back then. Obviously it's wrong, but it allows room for his character to grow and mature. - mka-c Feb 1, 2008
As a girl i should be offended, but i am really not. I mean since i also agree that characters have flaws especially protagonists i don't really worry about the extent of the flaws and i try not to have biases. I think i would be angry if his wrongs were being depicted as rights but that really is not happening here. It's more Woolf trying to make a realistic and believable character that readers can imagine. Even heroes in novels are given at least one flaw so we cannot really blame Jacob here. I am flawed and if he was not flawed i would think the story was even more boring. Who really wants to read about a man who cannot do anything wrong?- JJa-c Feb 1, 2008JJa-c
Woolf chose Jacob as a character because she was trying to do unorthodox things. Many protagonists up to this point were unrealistic in some aspect; for example, good guys were always good, bad guys were pure evil, tortured characters were constantly tormented ect. Jacob, on the other hand, is not so polarizing. He has many glaring flaws: I found him too proud and snobby to really like him; however, it is these flaws that make him a "real" character as opposed to a stereotype. He is not a convential protagonist in that he is not always a good person, but he is a real person in the respect that he has good and bad points that weigh in on his actions. Woolf was experimenting with writing in this book, so it makes sense that she would experiment with concept of the protagonist as well. - dsU-c Feb 1, 2008
LDO, I couldn't agree more. Jacob was not fun to read about; I frankly did not like him as a character. The way he treated women even really on made me not like this book. One woman that stands out in my mind is Florinda. Yes, she was beautiful, not she was completely brainless and basically a prostitute. She could not fulfill his desire for an intelligent companion, but that was okay because was good looking. I don't know maybe Woolf wants us to see Jacob making foolish decisions like this so that we are like hey that's not really smart. I think that Woolf, a "feminist writer," to use a character that "viewed women as inferior" was her way of proving that women seriously are not inferior. Maybe in not liking him, I could somewhat understand Woolf better. Any other thoughts?
-
I think that being able to see the dark side of Jacob is just another way that Woolf adds reality to her novel. She could probably focus on all of his good traits, and would seem just as admirable as any other protagonist, but we get to see Jacob for what he is and that makes him more human, or at least as human as a fictional character could possibly be. Most heros have one major flaw, but Jacob has many flaws because he is just like any other normal person, and is not at all perfect. This made him less of a likeable character, but I thought it was kind of cool to see the dark side of his character, and see a realistic view of what he is and not just some flawless person who would be much easier to like. -
All of you make great points about Jacob's Room. I have to agree with LDo, why would someone want to read a book about a man who thinks women are inferior? Who wants to read a book about someone who has flaws? But you have to remember, almost every single book you read, there will be a character, most of the time the main character, that has flaws. It is those flaws that could either bring that character down, or help bring them up.
It is good to read a book that has a character with flaws. How would you feel if you read a book with a practically perfect person. I personally think that it would be a boring book. We would have a character that never screws up, never gets into trouble, and pretty much has nothing that exciting happen to them. It is through the flaws and imperfections that we can see the excitement and craziness of the protagonist's world.
-
I agree with szd, flaws are the elements of characters that make them interesting. If characters didn't have flaws, we would basically be reading fairy tales. Yes they were exciting when we were in preschool, but we soon lost interest in their simple characters and plots because we progressed intellectually. It just seems natural to eventually crave more out the literarure we read. Not to say that every protagonist in the books we read has to be a serial killer or someone who is so messed up they commit suicide, but reading about characters with flaws and their battles to overcome those flaws is interesting. Remember, even Jesus was tempted in the desert by Satan. Jesus isn't evil because he had minor flaws, but it did make for a good read to seem him overcome them. -
Along with what MKo and SZd were saying, none of us are perfect. I for one would hate reading a book about a perfect man who handles everything perfectly. There would be no conflict, no learning or growth, and to the plot would be boring too. Even if you didn't like Jacob as a person he is still a perfect fit for the protagnistic role I think. He's a guy who we can have a strange fascination with just as many of the other characters do in the book. Sorry to all the girls, but who cares if he treated women as objects? Show me a guy who didn't do that back then. Obviously it's wrong, but it allows room for his character to grow and mature. -
As a girl i should be offended, but i am really not. I mean since i also agree that characters have flaws especially protagonists i don't really worry about the extent of the flaws and i try not to have biases. I think i would be angry if his wrongs were being depicted as rights but that really is not happening here. It's more Woolf trying to make a realistic and believable character that readers can imagine. Even heroes in novels are given at least one flaw so we cannot really blame Jacob here. I am flawed and if he was not flawed i would think the story was even more boring. Who really wants to read about a man who cannot do anything wrong?-
Woolf chose Jacob as a character because she was trying to do unorthodox things. Many protagonists up to this point were unrealistic in some aspect; for example, good guys were always good, bad guys were pure evil, tortured characters were constantly tormented ect. Jacob, on the other hand, is not so polarizing. He has many glaring flaws: I found him too proud and snobby to really like him; however, it is these flaws that make him a "real" character as opposed to a stereotype. He is not a convential protagonist in that he is not always a good person, but he is a real person in the respect that he has good and bad points that weigh in on his actions. Woolf was experimenting with writing in this book, so it makes sense that she would experiment with concept of the protagonist as well.
-